The Darlie Routier CaseHER PROOF

This part of the site is under construction.Please come back soon.If you find a place in the transcript that supports any of these points, please let me know where it is.
I will then link the point to that place in the transcript.
Please send the information to: webmaster

1) There were bloody finger/palm prints at the scene that do not match any family member. Also hairs (facial and limb) were found and were not matched with any known person in the house.

2) Two Murder weapons were used, only one was found. Two weapons because some of the deep wounds were too narrow to be made by the knife that was found. Also blood from the 7 year old was not on the knife that was found.

4) Before family members could see Darlie in the hospital the
morning of the attack, they were denied access. After the members
insisted, they were warned that Darlie was in bad shape and they better
have a strong stomach. During the visit the nurses changed some
bandages, exposing severe bruises and commenting on them.

6) First State psychologist does not agree with state and believes
Darlie. Second state psychologist was coerced by state because of
discrepancy in the doctors credentials were discovered by prosecutors.
State denied existence of first psychologist (exculpatory evidence) but
she was discovered 2 years after trial while reviewing financial
statements provided in response to an open records request.

7) Listen to 911 tape - could not be faked.
Find the best actor to comment. This tape clearly demonstrates a woman
pleading for help despite officers testimony that she showed no concern.

**Violations in due process, flawed logic, flawed procedure**

1) Key state investigators take the 5'th during cross examination by
defense denying defense to challenge accuser

2) Investigator Jimmy Patterson should not have been assigned to case
because his son was a potential suspect. He owns a car matching neighbors
description and was a defendant in a drug related drive by shooting in
which he was convicted. Another murder was committed in the same
neighborhood in the same week but this information was not given to the
media and the case was sealed until recently and is still unsolved.

3) Investigator concluded in first 30 minutes that Darlie was
the murderer,
the investigation was in the mode of building a case against Routier rather than investigating and seeing where the evidence leads. She was targeted at the expense of following up
on other leads.

4) First cop testified seeing the husband in the front yard when he
arrived. The 911 tape shows that the husband was in the house the entire
time till paramedics showed up. Who was the man that fooled the officer?

5) Many poor investigation techniques. Crime scene video being used as training tape for other police departments on how NOT to handle crime scenes, according to the author of the book "Media Tried Justice Denied"

10) Witnesses providing exculpatory evidence, were instructed by prosecutors under color of authority not to talk to defense attorneys.

11) At the scene, Paramedics were restricted by police, care delayed
to child still alive (Damon), the very child that Darlie was convicted of
killing. She was not convicted for the death of the other child (Devon)
who was dead before first cop arrived. Damon died after the paramedics
got to him.

12) Entire trial process was based on character assassination, not
merits, I.E.: Grave video, "Trailer trash" and similar prejudicial false
statements by prosecutors, witness tampering through mock trials which
caused witnesses to change testimony (nurses)

13) Bugging of grave without warrant.

14) Denial of defendant to cross examine accusers. Denial of defendant to show video recordings in full context because of investigators taking the fifth.

15) Detectable incompetence of police covered up by false and manipulated testimony.

17) Press release say that the husband slept through the whole thing but the 911 tape shows that the husband was assisting Darlie in helping the kids until paramedics showed up.

18) Darlie waives Fifth amendment to cooperate with police in effort to find killer. Investigators take the fifth under cross examination. Who is the one that has something to hide?

19) Credibility of expert witnesses were totally discredited after
trial and reported in the media. The problems included: Incompetence,
Goal was to convict rather than analyze evidence (see grievance hearing
filed by Officer Lynch)

20) Improper read back to the jury by the court reporter. Court
reporter admits filling a falsified record for the purpose of hiding her
mistake. There were tens of thousands of reported errors in the
transcript (other than typos). There was other misconduct by the court
reporter. Prosecutor refused to prosecute her for perjury dispite the
fact that the state paid $30,000 for the transcript and she sold several
copies to the media. Her conduct delayed the appeal for 2 years and
resulted in 6 hearings that would have otherwise been unnecessary.

** Possible reasons why **

1) Overwhelming political, media, and community pressure to solve the crime and close the case.

2) City council wanted arrest made so that upcoming fair would not be haunted.

3) City Mayor (who was previously charged with federal crimes) was selling high priced houses and preferred arrest to be within family rather than create stigma that this is a crime area for intruders.

4) First cop to arrive at scene immediately got sick at the sight of the victims and was indisposed for some time in the bathroom. He tried to hide this by changing story of what happened.

5) Cops, investigators and prosecutors made numerous errors (which are documented), needed to ensure conviction to avoid embarrassment of arresting wrong person or acquittal based on mistakes.

6) Chief Investigator looking out to avoid suspicion against his own son who was arrested and later convicted of a drug related drive by shooting along with other accomplices.

7) Since the real killer is unknown, there may be other reasons for this crime that were not yet considered.

** Convicted by a jury of her peers but **

1) State controls the evidence and investigation. Defense only gets
what State provides. Discovery is not a right in a Texas Criminal
proceeding. Only at the discretion of the judge. Only exculpatory
evidence is compulserary but the prosecutor is the gate keeper.

2) All family members were listed as a witness and the rule was
invoked which means no one but Darlie was in the courtroom to assist the
attorneys on how to rebut false testimony. The attornys never knew what
was false until after trial was over and family reviewed transcript.
Example - interpreting events at grave site, Darin being in front yard
was false, Nurses testimony, etc. Most of the witnesses were not called
because the sole purpose was merely to restrict them from hearing
testimony and assisting the defense.

3) Jury did not hear truthful testimony, and crucial information was
withheld from jury.

4) Because of these two practices, Texas Criminal trials is known among lawyers in Texas as "Trial by Ambush", not "Trial by Jury"

** Addressing specific evidence ** (partial list)

1) Crime scene photos shows manipulation (papers on couch, lamp shade, coffee table etc.) How can you say Darlies testimony is not consistent with crime scene photos when the photos themselves are not consistent.

2) State changes position during trial that the screen was cut from outside.

3) Evidence that kitchen knife was used to cut screen was impeached.

4) Bloody fingerprints do not match anyone legitimately in the house that night ( not any of the police, emergency people, neighbors or family,) Who do they belong to? Testimony was that prints were "unidentifiable" but they are decipherable.

PS: It is easier to convict an innocent person because the defense
does not know what to expect from the prosecution and therefore cannot
prepare rebuttals in time for trial. Also the Defense does not have
access to the fruits of the state's investigation, nor the same resources.
Also the state witnesses have a big pow wow before the trial to
coordinate their testimony, and as the testimony unfolds in the
courtroom, the defense witnesses are excluded from the court and are not
able to advise attorneys when false testimony is given. A guilty person
on the other hand, knows exactly what to hide, rebut and can attempt to
prepare a challenge to the prosecutor's case.